Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Feb 26, 2012 7:22am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: More on the DEAD...historical place & future directions

Having thought a bit more about DD's post, and all the comments that followed, thought I'd follow up with another "duh" post, per usual.

Although it remains to be seen whether the "biz model" will be profitable as "our" generation dies out (though the likes of LiA suggest at least one F1 cohort shares a lot with "us" originals that saw them), or how many newcomers will join up over the next 10-20 yrs as the band members pass on, etc., etc., I do think that we can say with confidence that the DEAD and their followers were relatively unique compared with most all other bands/performers/etc. And that this translates into a longer lasting impact than otherwise would occur.

I think a simple "thought experiment" makes the case: would your friends and family, if asked to make a "five point summary" that covered your interests, your hobbies, your life, potentially include, simply, "The Grateful Dead"?

I know that for me, virtually anyone that knows me well, even for just a few yrs, would include the DEAD 9 out of 10 times if providing a simple summary at my funeral, or some such...

Point being, we pass on what we love, and clearly, most of us love this band in a fashion that requires all around us to be impacted by it, whether they like it or not; and this kind of fanatical devotion translates into some form of impact through time, and across space (er, the Globe, folks...), that is unparalleled it seems to me.

I know that if I turned that little 5 pt summation around for any of my musically inclined friends, for some I'd say "the GD", but for not one would I consider listing "the Beatles...they just loved the Beatles, and never stopped; blah, blah, blah..."

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: light into ashes Date: Feb 26, 2012 1:07pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD...historical place & future directions

Not directly related to your post - but many people are saying how crucial the live experience was to getting into the Dead, hence how important the post-Dead jam bands are in creating new fans.

As someone who was hooked entirely by recordings, I realize I may be a freak, but I do have a different perspective.
So I wonder really, how many younger people are turned on to the Dead by first seeing Phish or Furthur or whoever, versus those who discover the Dead via recordings?

As a comparison, take Cream! I bet many people who saw them would say, "you couldn't understand how powerful it was without actually seeing them, the tapes just aren't the same!" Plenty of testimony to that effect. But YOU didn't have to see them to get hooked! - nor did most people.
Of course you can bring up the importance of social context - it was easy for you to discover Cream because you were around other people who were fans, etc - the most common way of discovering music, for sure.
(But there's all kinds of ways. You know how I got into Cream? Because the Wheels of Fire album had that bright silver cover. Whenever I looked at someone's record collection, I noticed this bright shiny double-album with the weird cover. Knew nothing about Cream except that Clapton was in it, and he had a reputation as being some great guitarist, so I became curious. As it happened, I listened not to that album first, but Fresh Cream - probably because I found it on tape for like $2 or something - and within about 2 or 3 songs, was blown away.)

Anyway - another point people make is that as the generation who experienced the Dead gets older, the passion for the Dead will diminish.
But I think there is an equal & opposite reaction as well - even more widespread than love for the band is Dislike of them & their whole scene. As I mentioned in the last thread, anti-Dead stereotypes are still alive & well & very prevalent in "mainstream" culture. And as time passes & the Dead become more 'historical,' I think this too will diminish, and more people in the future may be able to hear them with open minds.
Then again, maybe not!
Who knows what sea-changes might come in music that might make all rock bands sound as much like relics as the big-bands of the 40s...

This post was modified by light into ashes on 2012-02-26 21:07:13

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: user unknown Date: Feb 26, 2012 9:00pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD...historical place & future directions

"As someone who was hooked entirely by recordings, I realize I may be a freak"

You are not alone.

Though I obviously am not "hooked" to the extent that you are, nor do I possess your analytical abilities; I was drawn to the music of "the oldest juveniles in the state of California" when I purchased the monaural version of their first album, from a cut-out bin, in 1968. I listened exclusively to "official releases"(and didn't seek out all of them until after the release of WALSTIB) until 2002 when I saw The Other Ones. It was only then that I discovered the joy, and madness, of live concert recording, LMA, Deadhook and an amazing group of characters who have raised my GD knowledge exponentially.

As far as the future of GD music, I know I passed my love of the music along to my children(one likes GD better than the other). They, in turn, are passing this love of music to my grandchildren. And with Rhino at the helm, Grateful Dead music will be relentlessly marketed(though not maybe the particular bits and pieces we'd like to see). As long as there are adventurous listeners willing to try something "new"(at least to their ears), Rhino should be able to cultivate new fans for quite a while.



This post was modified by user unknown on 2012-02-27 05:00:17

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Feb 26, 2012 3:58pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD...historical place & future directions

That first imprint is not going away. It will be in the mix as GD are looked at thru time. Unless some great revisionist idea comes along, they are already stuck with the package. It will be a hand me down or something found in its small niche of Americana music for future newcomers.

It's so silly thinking only those that were physically at shows can get it. However, it is a huge factor in general that does not apply with Pops or Miles or Cream. The GD have so many shows, so many thousands of hours of recordings, and a multigeneraltional culture and history created over decades. Outside of WT, has anyone listened to Cream more then 5K times? (Which is kind of entry level number for GD) Or how about Miles? Pops?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Feb 26, 2012 6:54pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD... and how it relates to the Civil War

Well, only those who "saw the elephant" really "got" the Civil War. And of course there were as many "gets" as there were theaters, divisions, brigades, veterans ... there's a phrase, "the second Civil War," that refers to the way the generals (and veterans in general) argued about it in print for decades. The 19th c equivalent of a GD forum :-)

It's always true that nobody really "gets" a time but those who lived through it. Still, you get your CW obsessives of various stripes (from reenactors to buffs with a whole library full to just a couple books to those who will see a movie on it whenever it comes out, etc etc.) None of those "get" it, really, of course ... no one who saw it is alive ... but the ones with the library full do get SOMETHING important that comes at least a bit close.

That's what the Dead will be, of course. History. The CW came during the time of mass publication, so there were a gazillion books written by survivors -- the digital collection of its day, which offered an "entry" into it via memoirs/diaries/photographs on the battlefield. The GD came during a much more multi-media era, so the music CAN survive, and can (and will) encapsulate a historical era for many.

It won't be The Experience. But my experience wasn't your experience wasn't WT's wasn't Ringo's or Cliff's or thousands upon thousands of people not on this board. Everyone saw a different part of the elephant. Still, the very fact that we DO talk about "The Experience" (the elephant) will color the way the future perceives it ... and it'll be what folks try to "get" when they listen to the music.

Being part of this huge thing called The 60s, which absolutely cannot be "gotten" without listening to its music, will be a key reason the legacy will be kept alive. (Sorry Phish. Aside from the less-fascinating music, there's just not that historical peg to hang the hat on.) Future 60s historians and buffs of various stripes will undoubtedly encounter the Dead; they're hard to miss if you're interested in the counterculture. Kinda the way the 20th Maine is hard to miss if you're at all into the CW. It's hardly the whole shebang, but hard to miss if you pay any attention ... and then there's a whole fascinating "corpus," right?

So, it'll be a Venn diagram: when interest in 60s history overlaps with interest in music (without which it's hard to BE interested in the 60s, frankly), it will overlap with various bands (of course), one of the most fascinating of which, musically and culturally, and with a long continuation that went way past the 60s, will be the Dead.

A tiny slice? Sure, but also a big one. The Dead will be the 20th Maine of 60s history (which is inseparable from its music). Not bad when the elephant has long since ceased rampaging and trumpeting over the hills.



This post was modified by AltheaRose on 2012-02-27 02:54:14

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Feb 27, 2012 1:59pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD... and how it relates to the Civil War

Wait a minute...I get to play my "Ringo Card": HUH???!!!

You guys actually lost me, and it's military history time?

Okay, I am NOT a CW buff, having read fewer than 30 books on the topic, I'd guess, but still...never thought that would happen.

Don't get me wrong, I get the "got it...elephant...be there now..er, then..." biz, and can make assumptions about the rest, but just had to say, you might be taking a page out of my book on the cryptic writing approach, chapter 3, which so distresses RingLee-O.

;)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Feb 27, 2012 6:35pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD... and how it relates to the Civil War

Sorry. Should have tossed in some dogs.

Now does this make more sense?

http://www.old-picture.com/civil-war/pictures/George-Armstrong-Custer.jpg

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Feb 26, 2012 6:52pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD... and how it relates to the Civil War

The cause is odious, but I think Longstreet gets the shaft: as he did in spades after the CW. Becoming a Republican after just through all the pepper in the pot.

I would argue that the Elephant was live. That was were the fundamental primal communication happened which can not be replicated anywhere (well maybe in a hologram, ect.), whatever ones personal trip while there. In any experience we have now, interacting with this wonderful scene that I agree has taken root and will continue, we will never see the Elephant again. I agree that as far as a rock bands influence beyond music GD is huge and it may not fade away too much at all.

Now I lay me down to sleep
In mud many fathoms deep
If I'm not here when you awake
Just hunt me up with a oyster rake

(month and year when Union soldiers sang this)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Feb 26, 2012 7:40pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD... and how it relates to the Civil War

Random guess for CW: Mud march, Jan '63

Random guess if it's a muddy GD: June '83

Maybe Longstreet was the Brent of the CW.

This post was modified by AltheaRose on 2012-02-27 03:40:10

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Feb 27, 2012 10:11am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD... and how it relates to the Civil War

Ha! I think he was the Brent of the CW.

Without the name of the army AR easily brushes aside the Mud March question. Mud March GD could be '89 Alpine too.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Dudley Dead Date: Feb 27, 2012 8:42am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD... and how it relates to the Civil War

Garcia as a fat Bobbie Lee ? Bobby as a nonviolent Stonewall (that look in his eyes ).
This could really get ridiculous ( opps ! it has !).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SomeDarkHollow Date: Feb 27, 2012 10:40am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD... and how it relates to the Civil War

Deadhead geeks meet Civil war geeks

http://www.cwreenactors.com/forum/

We are one big, happy, socially stunted family.

"Dude, the Battle of Shiloh they did in '73 was the best ever!"
"No way, the one in '82 blew that one out of the water"

This post was modified by SomeDarkHollow on 2012-02-27 18:40:25

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Feb 27, 2012 6:53pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD... and how it relates to the Civil War

And look! Here's the shirt! (Couldn't find a Union one. The South seems to win in reenactor apparel.)


http://image.spreadshirt.com/image-server/image/product/18188485/view/1/type/png/width/378/height/378/civil-war-csa-virginia.png

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SomeDarkHollow Date: Feb 28, 2012 5:02am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD... and how it relates to the Civil War

And here I was thinking that the Trekkies and us had cornered the market on geekdom.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Pig Street ! Date: Feb 27, 2012 9:09am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD... and how it relates to the Civil War

Here is proof

Attachment: tigerbolt-6bmmq84.jpg

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: DeadRed1971 Date: Feb 27, 2012 9:41am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD... and how it relates to the Civil War

Fucking brilliant!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: DeadRed1971 Date: Feb 27, 2012 9:49am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD... and how it relates to the Civil War

Don't give Ken Burns any ideas. He's a Head too.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Pig Street ! Date: Feb 27, 2012 10:12am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD... and how it relates to the Civil War

Maybe Jer was influenced by him...Dunno

Attachment: jg_Giants.jpg

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Feb 26, 2012 4:38pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD...historical place & future directions

That's an excellent, simple metric: so many of us, and many of "our" converts, have done exactly this with the DEAD, and it is rare, so much more rare, for it to be true of folks for say, CREAM (I am working on it!), and your other examples.

I guess most of us have said something along these lines above, but I was expecting a Phish or Who or PFld fan to chime in with "I am EXACTLY the same way with...", and they haven't yet (duh, wrong Forum, but you know what I mean--someone to say "yeah, I have roughly the same level of interest in even ONE other band").

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Feb 26, 2012 1:16pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: LiA was MADE without Live DEAD...

It was, of course, you I was thinking of; and, not just to make you feel better, but look at how in essence, when you come down to it, I am MUCH like you: I saw the band, BUT now feel I "missed" it, since I didn't see 68!? Pathetic, eh?

And, I agree with the addt'l comments above, about how we are music lovers, in general, and certainly "seeing them live" matters, BUT as has been said so often (and I just said again--I only HEARD recordings of 68), the simple truth is, even with all the negative stereo types, it seems to me that DEAD HEADS are STILL being "made".

LiA, you are exhibit one!

And, I know that fanatics are still being made for other bands, but just don't think it's at the same rate/intensity.

Do agree, Dham, that we don't know what this "means" statistically, ie, what are the total numbers, will it mean profit for the sales dept, etc., etc.

But, that's really my main pt: some how, some way, folks that are largely similar to me (ie, YOU, LiA, and I hope you don't mind the comparison) can still be produced without having seen the band.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: light into ashes Date: Feb 26, 2012 1:38pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: WTell was MADE without Live CREAM...

(Pardon the little edit!)

Given that I was hooked by a 1968 show, I am even more of a rarity...that must be vanishingly uncommon. I guess I am an exhibit for fanatical obsessives, though!

I am sure the Dead will have their place in music history - though it may be a small place. Given their type of music - full of long jams, based on improvisation - most Dead stuff can never really be 'popular' or 'mainstream' except for some of the easy-listening country-rock-type songs they did. (Dire Wolf will always trump Dark Star in popular taste.) But that has its place, too.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Diamondhead Date: Feb 27, 2012 12:10pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD...historical place & future directions

You just reminded me of the first time I saw Fleetwood Mac. Don't laugh. The early incarnation of Buckingham/Nicks. I had the record, but the live show was totally another animal. I never listened to them the same way (or loudness) again.

To me, live was everything. And I have the ears to prove it. :)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SomeDarkHollow Date: Feb 27, 2012 6:46am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD...historical place & future directions

I've always seen Jerry and the boys as having a lot in common with Henry Ford. Started out small with a relatively unusual and revolutionary product. Many folks said it wouldn't catch on. But as time went on, both began turning out more and more units reaching an ever increasing market. Jerry may not have reached the numbers that Ford did, but it was impressive nonetheless in its effectiveness. In my opinion, his factory reached its peak of production in the mid-80's, thanks in large part to MTV and the genious of touring the East Coast during college vacations. Talk about identifying your target market. But with Jerry's death, we saw the production line start to slow and we can now see the ultimate end of the original factory on the not too distant horizon. But just as the original Ford models have become "classics" and highly desireable by folks who weren't alive when the were made, so too does Jerry's early music (thankfully or not, it appears the products of his later years are already being forgotten...soon tunes like "Liberty" will fade into the mist just as the Ford Fiesta). Will the music ever reach the masses in the same way? No, but there will always be a hard-core group of collectors that brings in new folks who can appreciate the true beauty of an original. I see the folks here as bgeing like the attendees of the Barrett-Jackson Car Auction, people young and old alike, joined in their mutual appreciation of true works of art.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Feb 27, 2012 1:54pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD...historical place & future directions

Ha! The Ford Fiesta will live FOREVER in the Tell household...when we lived in Western Australia for a yr in the 90s, you could rent one for $15 a wk (!?), and we crammed the five of us in that thing and drove to Hell and back, repeatedly...never had an issue; great mileage, and ZERO pickup. Kids were all under 10, so they actually fit in what was loosely termed "a backseat" (or in their terms "part o the boot, mate", given how it merged seemlessly with the "trunk" as we know it).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SomeDarkHollow Date: Feb 28, 2012 5:06am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD...historical place & future directions

Part of me is laughing, the other part is crying.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Dhamma1 Date: Feb 26, 2012 8:45am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD...historical place & future directions

I'm not sure I agree with you, Tell. The depth of feeling shared by those of us who lived through it can't be passed on to people who didn't. At some point fairly soon (historically speaking), there will be no one alive on the planet who saw the Dead. The work has to stand on its own alongside all the other creative work that rolls down through the decades into the perpetual future.

And I think it will. I think it will stand alone as "classic" in part because it epitomizes a time (in the way Gershwin epitomizes the Twenties or Chuck Berry the Fifties), and also because the repertoire includes so many genres of 20th-century American music (Cold Jordan to Nobody's Fault to Promised Land to Dark Star and beyond).

But more importantly, much of the Dead's original material expresses transcendental insights that have crossed cultures and centuries and will always resonate with large numbers of thoughtful people. Of course, the Web and mass media might eliminate thoughtful people in the future, but as long as there are people who wonder about the big questions, there will be an audience for the Dead.

This post was modified by Dhamma1 on 2012-02-26 16:45:44

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Capt. Cook Date: Feb 26, 2012 9:22am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD...historical place & future directions

If you were say 18 when you saw the Grateful Dead perform, sadly in 1995, you would be today around 35, with plenty of good years to pass along your Dicks Picks and Europe 72box. I never got to see John Coltrane perform Kind Of Blue with Miles Davis, but the magic has been passed down by others for me to understand...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Old_NJ_Head_Zimmer Date: Feb 26, 2012 8:16am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD...historical place & future directions

Tell
I would agree on the "summation" experiment as most likely every one of my family, friends and coworkers would include GD in my case and there is something to be said about that and it's impact.

But

I think if you look at deadheads in general, they are music lovers - period. We take all musical forms to a level most people wouldn't go to. The need to feel emotions thru music. The highest joys, the deepest blues, the intellectual stimulation, the heartbeat of the human soul. Some find it in science, sports, business acumen, we seem to relate to life thru music. Thus, we are attracted to "something" in the grateful dead experiment.

That being said, I'm not sure where the boys place in history will land.

Think about all the bands and artists who MOST people would consider as significant and important. Almost all have had commercial success and have been mainstream to some point. I suspect that once Phil and Bobby pass on from this bright blue ball, interest in the band will fall off significantly.

What would have happened if all the reincarnations of the dead or related bands would have stopped once Garcia died. IMO, the would be far far less interest in the band today.

The LIVE experience is what drove the dedication and that continues to bring in younger fans today. Without that, there are not a lot of ways for new legions of fans to get turned on to this UNDERGROUND music.

The band always said, there was no way to translate the live experience to a recording. Maybe releasing a lot of the vault will help, but think about how long it took you to appreciate a 30 minute dark star. People in general don't have the 20 years of listening to relish the difference between 68 and 69 and there will be no hook to snag them.

How will new fans be brought into this acquired taste?

There will always be musicologists who debate origins and influences, and the dead will always be in those discussions. Just don't think they will ever be given the place most deadheads think they deserve.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: portmcgroin Date: Feb 26, 2012 12:29pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD...historical place & future directions

The music will live on. Based on the fact that the Dead is looked at as thee pioneer's of the Jamband Scene as younger people get into Jambands some fans will end up here listen to a show from 69 or 71 and forget about that shitty band they thought they loved. Most bands can't come close to the lyrics that Hunter and Barlow have left behind. Not to mention the different eras of the band. They have touched on so many genres of music. Are there any other bands that can even come close?
You have the Dead covers project going on at dead.net. Almost every city has some form of a Dead cover band that plays around town. The mix of age at the recent Furthur shows I went to had a lot of young fans that will influence others etc..Look at the major music festivals that have popped up since 95(Gathering of the Vibes, All Good etc..) that are based on bringing people together the way a Dead show did. Will it diminish? Probably; but I would not underestimate the impact they have had on other bands and the foundation they have helped lay down.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Feb 26, 2012 9:18am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD...historical place & future directions

All great threads and posts lately on this subject. One of the very cool parts of this forum.

The musical explosion of the 60s I think will cause GD to be lumped together historically with many other great musicians. It's tough when Bob and the Beatles are right in your time frame. It's kinda like trying to win a ring when Bill Russell was around- even if your name was Wilt Chamberlain. It looks like my generation will keep the torch alive and spawn many cover bands, but what about the kid who is 20 now who saw a few Furthur shows and their passion for the music in 2050? There will be a few who will still be clamoring for '68 or 30 minute D/S. However, I think GD was largely experiential and without being part of the alchemy of band and audience it can't help but have a future that is much dimmer. Indeed, there was nothing like a GD concert. Ever.

As a side note- you wankers who were able to experience the music then in all it's bright introduction are a bunch of lucky mofos. I got a few (few) in my generation and you have a mother lode. Last one out, don't seal that silver mine.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Diamondhead Date: Feb 26, 2012 5:30pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD...historical place & future directions

Yup - I'm your grand pa. That's one the advantages of old age - you get to say 'heh heh heh, I remember when...'.

And I totally agree - it was the live experience that sucked me in, and it's the same that I try to recapture in my headphones. I was lucky to be in front of it and it still captures me.

I've always thought that the Dead were the psychedelic Benny Goodman group with one twist. As opposed to Boppers, they figured out a way to make folks dance to some really twisted music.

“We're like licorice. Not everybody likes licorice, but the people who like licorice really like licorice.” Thank you Jerry.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Diamondhead Date: Feb 27, 2012 12:15pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More on the DEAD...historical place & future directions

Not a duh post Tell. A thinking post.

I remember years ago being amused by my mother in law when she bopped around to Benny Goodman @ Carnegie Hall.